Disqualification at matches

We were in a match this morning wherein our opponent smashed into us and into our starting tile during autonomous. We were halfway tipped over…of course the opposing alliance was disqualified. But the officials disabled their bot while we were on top of them.

In essence, we were completely disabled as well, couldnt move, couldnt score, and eventually lost the match.

Shouldnt they remove the disqualified robot off the field? It doesnt sound right that a disqualified & disabled robot impeded our bot from helping our alliance in this match.

There is no rule that permits a referee to remove a disabled robot from the field. Does it suck? Yes. But there’s nothing that can be done.

As per this Q+A, if a robots that are disabled can still pin an opposing robot. However, as this was a qualifications match, so even if they were disqualified the result of the match would have been the same and you would not have been awarded any win points.

They were disqualified and disabled. The question (I believe) was whether disabled robots should be removed from the field so that they do not get in the way of the robots trying to play the game.

I disagree with your second sentence there…

Based on the link you provided, the opposing bot that was DQd in autonomous and disabled should have been called for pinning during driver control and the team disqualified…they are the ones who should not be given any win points or strength points.

In qualification matches, TEAMS are DQ’d. Not alliances. If a DQ’d robot’s alliance wins, their partner still gets the WP.

Breaking the plane of the opponent’s starting tile doesn’t result in a DQ. It is a disablement. You never DQ and disable for the same offense.


Why not? If the disabled bot was pinning our bot at the start of driver control, then they are pinning. That is what Karthik said in the thread above.

If this scenario is true, then a team can, in essence, design a bot that would simply take out the other alliance’s best bot every time. Kinda like an enforcer…

Yeah, I read that. This is probably something that the Game Design Committee will have to consider making a change to.

In our match, our alliance partner tipped over during autonomous. Which left one clawbot with the entire field to himself.

Oh well…

Yes. They could. We did, in Sack Attack. It grabbed the best bot in the field and put them in a corner. It worked okay. And didn’t get disabled.

We thouht about doing that this year (Toss Up), too. Except it would have grabbed BOTH bots, and locked them down. And, you know, not violated the pinning/trapping rules. We decided to go for a zone defense instead of man-to-man, though, because actually catching your opponents is more difficult than you might think. Getting one wasn’t too bad, but we didn’t think that two was going to happen.

Yes, you can be DQed for pinning in driver control. It was also ruled that there is no penalty for pinning during autonomous. I bolded where you said “DQed in autonomous,” which I was simply trying to say, You can’t be DQed untill 5 seconds into driver control.

They were DQd in autonomous for running into our starting tile.

Its water under the bridge, but it doesnt sound right that a bot is DQd in autonomous, disabled from moving while our bot is resting on top of it. I just want Karthik and the GDC crew to consider an amendment to the rules so that in the future, a bot in our shoes is given room to move around the DQd bot before it is disabled.

No. I can assure you, 100% that the opposing robot was NOT disqualified from entering your coloured tile. That warrants a DISABLE. Not a DISQUALIFICATION. Don’t believe me? Here’s <SG6>.

Nothing about a disqualification. That occurred after, because he was pinning you. As defined in <SG3>.

There is no rule that allows for a robot to be removed from the field. The reason for that is that disqualifications are anounced at the end of the match, to allow a referee to change their mind and encourage teams to continue playing to the best of their ability. In this case, the rules caused you to loose a match. That sucks. But they’re written this way on purpose.

I (now) fully understand the rules, but it doesnt mean that in the future, these rules cannot be changed to eliminate unfair scenarios like what happened to our alliance. We lost, we accepted it, but I am bringing this up to the GDC so that they can provide a fix to a flaw in the rules.

Removing robots from the field causes two problems. One, I don’t trust a referee to pull my robot off the field. I got up, every time at Worlds, and grabbed it myself. They don’t know how to move it without breaking things. Two, it unfairly penalized their alliance partner, because then the match is 2v1 in your favour.

The rule isn’t going to change.

Why wont it change? Are you part of the GDC?

Disabling a robot that crosses its opposing alliance tile automatically gives the offending alliance a 1-2 robot disadvantage.

Once again, you’re confusing a DQ with a Disable. The two are entirely unrelated.

It won’t change for the reasons I outlined above, plus safety. You have robots running around the field, and you want a referee to one, catch a moving robot (remember, DQ doesn’t mean Disable), and two pull it off without affecting the position of game pieces, other robots, or the flow of the match? Really think about that for a minute, and tell me if it sounds reasonable.

By all means, talk to anyone you’d like. I’m just explaining why I don’t think it’s likely to happen.

Although I don’t agree with the ethics of purposely using this maneuver to disable the opposing robots it seems to be in within the rules and probably make me blow a gasket. :mad:

Thank goodness somebody else started this thread we had the same problem 2 matches after our first match (against you). 7090 b pinned us the whole match. but what really mad me mad was that we weren’t able to help our partner win we ended up losing and it doesn’t count against the dqed team but the other teams gets a lose (morality).